Offensively or Defensively. I guess it's hard to argue with the most efficient offense league wide. But even at that, are there signs in it that point to too much regulaton? What about defensively? I guess I feel it's a lil less so than the offensive end. But what do you think?
That's a tough question. I think the tight reigns have been useful in teaching the young players the fundamentals, how to play right, but if this team is going to bust through to the top of the NBA, they will need to open it up some. I have no need to see them become a running team, but just a slightly quicker pace, especially on O would be nice. These young guys thrive under Nates firm grip, but as they learn how to play "the right way", I think they can try and incorporate those fundamentals into a quicker pace.
Agree. You know I watch Steve Blake. He looks really regulated to me. I almost think too much regulation was Sergio Rodriguezes problem here in Portland. But maybe not. I do think to a sense the offense is tied down some. That's evident by some of the points play on the team.
I think certain players thrive under the current ridged system, while others will be better if left to their own a little more. Outlaw and Batum for example I think are better in the current system. Rudy and Aldridge would be better opened up a little. Oden and Roy I am not sure about. There is no one system that will make the best use of all the players. We just have to find the pace that makes the best overall use of the team.
Regulation is a must on defense but hampers offense when over-stressed. I like gambling a little and pushing the pace on both ends to keep the opponent on their heels. Maybe 70% regulation on defense and 30% on offense. A high-flying game. Last year Nate "regulated" 100% on defense and 95% on offense. (the -5% was 'cause he'd look silly screaming to Sergio to pull back on a 3-on-1 break). Can't argue with Nate's season record, but I find a flashier, game with lots of improvising by the players more entertaining, and entertainment is the only reason I watch the Blazers. I like a coach who teaches in practice and sits quietly watching from the bench in games.
I agree with God that it's really hard to tell now. It's very difficult to argue with the 54 win result which could be considered overachieving. I do think the team is regulated but it's difficult to say it's hurting results. It maybe helping the overall result for the team.
[video=youtube;6x5Olen_1co]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6x5Olen_1co"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6x5Olen_1co[/video]
I don't know about on defense. The only regulation I've seen on that side of the ball was the way we ALWAYS switched on the pick and roll. That was just this season though. On offense we're definitely over regulated. That should change significantly this year because of Miller. I predict bad things if it doesn't.
Let's take this a step further. How many of you feel too much regulation was Portlands main problem in the playoffs versus the rockets?
I agree with you on Outlaw. I think the over regulations effects the playmakers more than players who have the ok to go out and score.
When a team has savvy vets/superstar talent then it's a lot easier for a coach to just sort of let them play, but this requires guys who have played for a long time together or at least have a point guard who can act as something of a coach on the floor. The Blazers in the past couple of years have thrived under a structured offense because most of them were either extremely young or in the case of some of the players who had been around awhile not all that proficient/dynamic on offense. There's probably a bit of the Mr. Miyagi treatment going on -- lots of "wax on, wax off" repetitions and hopefully with time the team develops more of a feel for situations rather than having to rely on timeouts or looking over to the bench to see what the coach wants them to run. In any case, I'm results oriented not style oriented; I couldn't care less how the game is managed and what the team looks like as long as the end result is Ws and success. The degree to which that means they will be "regulated" in the short and long term remains to be seen, but my guess is that with a highly proficient, veteran point guard in Miller and a prolific talent like Roy to initiate the offense I think there's a decent chance we'll see less high pick and rolls and isolation plays and a little more full court offense -- so long as they can get stops and come out on the break.
last three years: 32 wins 41 wins 54 wins. Last season the second highest points per 100 possessions in the league (efficiency). Looks to me like Nate is doing something right -- efficient scoring (even if it's at a slow pace) beats the hell out of inefficient scoring. You be the judge.
unfortunately for you, the blazers are more interested in winning games than playing what you personally feel is the most entertaining type of basketball.
Nate McMillan produced one of the best coaching seasons in my memory based on the talent available to him. I give the OP credit for actually coming up with another unique criticism of the coach of a very young 54-win team that started Steve Blake, Nic Batum, and Joel Przybilla for the majority of the season. Well done in a red meat sorta way.
Why do you post in such a confrontational way? It appears to me that you are more interested in getting in arguments than having a discussion about the Blazers. Over and over you post these snide responses. You may actually have something to say, but it all gets looked over when the post is ordered in such a distasteful way. I don't think I have ever bitten and gotten into an argument with you, but I see that others do. Perhaps you are just board and looking to argue about anything, I don't know, but it sure doesn't seem like an intelligent way to present any argument. This does not mean you aren't intelligent, just that you don't display your intelligence here.
